Kate Bush Hounds of love shoot out

[S888Wheel]

Just finished the first round of listening between the following issues of
hounds of Love

1. Original U.K. issue
2. U.S. Promo on grey marbled vinyl
3. Japanese Issue
4. Simply Vinyl reissue
5. EMI Century reissue
6. original U.K. CD issue just for kicks.

I can say upon my initial comparisons they break down into three distictive
groups of quality: 1. just plain crappy, 2. excellent but clearly lacking in
one or more areas, 3. clearly superior in every way.

First the crappy

Original U.K. CD
U.S. promo on grey marbled vinyl.

They both sucked and in very similar ways. Muddy yet glassy sound. The CD had
better bass extension (not that it was good) but it had that typical early CD
tin can quality. The LP was not as noisy as I expected but it was a mess in the
imaging department. The sound was kind of lumped together vaguely between the
speakers with no specific imaging and no depth. The CD wasn't much better in
this regard. Both were painfully lacking in detail and dynamics. All in all i
would have to listen more to say which sucked worse but I simply don't want to.

The excellent but clearly flawed group.

Japanese issue
Original U.K. issue
EMI Century reissue

the original U.K. issue and the EMI Century reissue were the most similar. The
U.K. original had a fuller midbass but was a bit brighter. They both had decent
imaging and both were lacking in detail. The Japanese issue killed both of
these in detail and imaged a bit better with a greater spread but it was too
bright and etched. It was also noticably lacking in bass.

The clear winner

Simply Vinyl

It was so superior in every way that, as usual despite all claims that nothing
surprises me any more, I was shocked. It was far richer, warmer and more
detailed than any of the other versions. It was far more dynamic and most
importantly it was far more enveloping which I think is essential to the
enjoyment of this album. The imaging was vastly superior to all the other
versons in every way. Also, this was the only version that wasn't bright at
all. That matters a lot to me. It was the least bright and the most detailed.
Go figure.

[chris]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
> Just finished the first round of listening between the following issues of
> hounds of Love
>
> 1. Original U.K. issue
> 2. U.S. Promo on grey marbled vinyl
> 3. Japanese Issue
> 4. Simply Vinyl reissue
> 5. EMI Century reissue
> 6. original U.K. CD issue just for kicks.
>
> I can say upon my initial comparisons they break down into three
distictive
> groups of quality: 1. just plain crappy, 2. excellent but clearly lacking
in
> one or more areas, 3. clearly superior in every way.
>
> First the crappy
>
> Original U.K. CD
> U.S. promo on grey marbled vinyl.
>
> They both sucked and in very similar ways. Muddy yet glassy sound. The CD
had
> better bass extension (not that it was good) but it had that typical early
CD
> tin can quality. The LP was not as noisy as I expected but it was a mess
in the
> imaging department. The sound was kind of lumped together vaguely between
the
> speakers with no specific imaging and no depth. The CD wasn't much better
in
> this regard. Both were painfully lacking in detail and dynamics. All in
all i
> would have to listen more to say which sucked worse but I simply don't
want to.
>
> The excellent but clearly flawed group.
>
> Japanese issue
> Original U.K. issue
> EMI Century reissue
>
> the original U.K. issue and the EMI Century reissue were the most similar.
The
> U.K. original had a fuller midbass but was a bit brighter. They both had
decent
> imaging and both were lacking in detail. The Japanese issue killed both of
> these in detail and imaged a bit better with a greater spread but it was
too
> bright and etched. It was also noticably lacking in bass.
>
> The clear winner
>
> Simply Vinyl
>
> It was so superior in every way that, as usual despite all claims that
nothing
> surprises me any more, I was shocked. It was far richer, warmer and more
> detailed than any of the other versions. It was far more dynamic and most
> importantly it was far more enveloping which I think is essential to the
> enjoyment of this album. The imaging was vastly superior to all the other
> versons in every way. Also, this was the only version that wasn't bright
at
> all. That matters a lot to me. It was the least bright and the most
detailed.
> Go figure.

curious said Alice

Have you tried cutting the vinyl to a CD and then compare the two ?
i.e. is it a function of CD-ing or the orginal mastering process ?

Chris

[S888Wheel]

I said

<<
> Just finished the first round of listening between the following issues of
> hounds of Love
>
> 1. Original U.K. issue
> 2. U.S. Promo on grey marbled vinyl
> 3. Japanese Issue
> 4. Simply Vinyl reissue
> 5. EMI Century reissue
> 6. original U.K. CD issue just for kicks.
>
> I can say upon my initial comparisons they break down into three
distictive
> groups of quality: 1. just plain crappy, 2. excellent but clearly lacking
in
> one or more areas, 3. clearly superior in every way.
>
> First the crappy
>
> Original U.K. CD
> U.S. promo on grey marbled vinyl.
>
> They both sucked and in very similar ways. Muddy yet glassy sound. The CD
had
> better bass extension (not that it was good) but it had that typical early
CD
> tin can quality. The LP was not as noisy as I expected but it was a mess
in the
> imaging department. The sound was kind of lumped together vaguely between
the
> speakers with no specific imaging and no depth. The CD wasn't much better
in
> this regard. Both were painfully lacking in detail and dynamics. All in
all i
> would have to listen more to say which sucked worse but I simply don't
want to.
>
> The excellent but clearly flawed group.
>
> Japanese issue
> Original U.K. issue
> EMI Century reissue
>
> the original U.K. issue and the EMI Century reissue were the most similar.
The
> U.K. original had a fuller midbass but was a bit brighter. They both had
decent
> imaging and both were lacking in detail. The Japanese issue killed both of
> these in detail and imaged a bit better with a greater spread but it was
too
> bright and etched. It was also noticably lacking in bass.
>
> The clear winner
>
> Simply Vinyl
>
> It was so superior in every way that, as usual despite all claims that
nothing
> surprises me any more, I was shocked. It was far richer, warmer and more
> detailed than any of the other versions. It was far more dynamic and most
> importantly it was far more enveloping which I think is essential to the
> enjoyment of this album. The imaging was vastly superior to all the other
> versons in every way. Also, this was the only version that wasn't bright
at
> all. That matters a lot to me. It was the least bright and the most
detailed.
> Go figure.


Chris said

curious said Alice

Have you tried cutting the vinyl to a CD and then compare the two ?

No I haven't.

i.e. is it a function of CD-ing or the orginal mastering process ?

Chris

I am confident the mastering is the primary and most significant cause of these
differences.






>><BR><BR>

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

> I said
>
> <<
>> Just finished the first round of listening between the following
>> issues of hounds of Love
>>
>> 1. Original U.K. issue
>> 2. U.S. Promo on grey marbled vinyl
>> 3. Japanese Issue
>> 4. Simply Vinyl reissue
>> 5. EMI Century reissue
>> 6. original U.K. CD issue just for kicks.
>>
>> I can say upon my initial comparisons they break down into three
> distictive
>> groups of quality: 1. just plain crappy, 2. excellent but clearly
>> lacking
> in
>> one or more areas, 3. clearly superior in every way.
>>
>> First the crappy
>>
>> Original U.K. CD
>> U.S. promo on grey marbled vinyl.
>>
>> They both sucked and in very similar ways. Muddy yet glassy sound.
>> The CD
> had
>> better bass extension (not that it was good) but it had that typical
>> early
> CD
>> tin can quality. The LP was not as noisy as I expected but it was a
>> mess
> in the
>> imaging department. The sound was kind of lumped together vaguely
>> between
> the
>> speakers with no specific imaging and no depth. The CD wasn't much
>> better
> in
>> this regard. Both were painfully lacking in detail and dynamics. All
>> in
> all i
>> would have to listen more to say which sucked worse but I simply
>> don't
> want to.
>>
>> The excellent but clearly flawed group.
>>
>> Japanese issue
>> Original U.K. issue
>> EMI Century reissue
>>
>> the original U.K. issue and the EMI Century reissue were the most
>> similar.
> The
>> U.K. original had a fuller midbass but was a bit brighter. They both
>> had decent imaging and both were lacking in detail. The Japanese
>> issue killed both of these in detail and imaged a bit better with a
>> greater spread but it was
> too
>> bright and etched. It was also noticably lacking in bass.
>>
>> The clear winner
>>
>> Simply Vinyl
>>
>> It was so superior in every way that, as usual despite all claims
>> that
> nothing
>> surprises me any more, I was shocked. It was far richer, warmer and
>> more detailed than any of the other versions. It was far more
>> dynamic and most importantly it was far more enveloping which I
>> think is essential to the enjoyment of this album. The imaging was
>> vastly superior to all the other versons in every way. Also, this
>> was the only version that wasn't bright
> at
>> all. That matters a lot to me. It was the least bright and the most
> detailed.
>> Go figure.
>
>
> Chris said
>
> curious said Alice
>
> Have you tried cutting the vinyl to a CD and then compare the two ?

> No I haven't.

To do such a thing would be well beyond sockpuppet wheel's intellectual and
physical resources. Remember that sockpuppet wheel hides behind aliases, has
no known education, no known job, no known posessions.

[S888Wheel]

<< > I said
>
> <<
>> Just finished the first round of listening between the following
>> issues of hounds of Love
>>
>> 1. Original U.K. issue
>> 2. U.S. Promo on gray marbled vinyl
>> 3. Japanese Issue
>> 4. Simply Vinyl reissue
>> 5. EMI Century reissue
>> 6. original U.K. CD issue just for kicks.
>>
>> I can say upon my initial comparisons they break down into three
> distinctive
>> groups of quality: 1. just plain crappy, 2. excellent but clearly
>> lacking
> in
>> one or more areas, 3. clearly superior in every way.
>>
>> First the crappy
>>
>> Original U.K. CD
>> U.S. promo on gray marbled vinyl.
>>
>> They both sucked and in very similar ways. Muddy yet glassy sound.
>> The CD
> had
>> better bass extension (not that it was good) but it had that typical
>> early
> CD
>> tin can quality. The LP was not as noisy as I expected but it was a
>> mess
> in the
>> imaging department. The sound was kind of lumped together vaguely
>> between
> the
>> speakers with no specific imaging and no depth. The CD wasn't much
>> better
> in
>> this regard. Both were painfully lacking in detail and dynamics. All
>> in
> all i
>> would have to listen more to say which sucked worse but I simply
>> don't
> want to.
>>
>> The excellent but clearly flawed group.
>>
>> Japanese issue
>> Original U.K. issue
>> EMI Century reissue
>>
>> the original U.K. issue and the EMI Century reissue were the most
>> similar.
> The
>> U.K. original had a fuller midbass but was a bit brighter. They both
>> had decent imaging and both were lacking in detail. The Japanese
>> issue killed both of these in detail and imaged a bit better with a
>> greater spread but it was
> too
>> bright and etched. It was also noticeably lacking in bass.
>>
>> The clear winner
>>
>> Simply Vinyl
>>
>> It was so superior in every way that, as usual despite all claims
>> that
> nothing
>> surprises me any more, I was shocked. It was far richer, warmer and
>> more detailed than any of the other versions. It was far more
>> dynamic and most importantly it was far more enveloping which I
>> think is essential to the enjoyment of this album. The imaging was
>> vastly superior to all the other versions in every way. Also, this
>> was the only version that wasn't bright
> at
>> all. That matters a lot to me. It was the least bright and the most
> detailed.
>> Go figure.
>
>
> Chris said
>
> curious said Alice
>
> Have you tried cutting the vinyl to a CD and then compare the two?


I said


> No, I haven't.

Arny said


<<
To do such a thing would be well beyond sockpuppet wheel's intellectual and
physical resources.


Once again Arny engages in sociopathic fantasies about the inadequacies of
others to help ease the pain of his own miserably mediocre life.


Arny said

<< Remember that sockpuppet wheel hides behind aliases, has
no known education, no known job, no known posessions.

What makes you think anyone wants to remember your lies? All in all Arny, your
contribution to the audio related content of this thread seems to be right in
line with your life as a bitter chronic underachiever. Good show. by the way it
is possessions not posessions.

[JBorg]

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "S888Wheel" wrote in message


>>
>>> Just finished the first round of listening between the following
>>> issues of hounds of Love
>>>
>>> 1. Original U.K. issue
>>> 2. U.S. Promo on grey marbled vinyl
>>> 3. Japanese Issue
>>> 4. Simply Vinyl reissue
>>> 5. EMI Century reissue
>>> 6. original U.K. CD issue just for kicks.
>>>
>>> I can say upon my initial comparisons they break down into three
>>> distictive groups of quality: 1. just plain crappy, 2. excellent but
>>> clearly lacking
>> in
>>> one or more areas, 3. clearly superior in every way.
>>>
>>> First the crappy
>>>
>>> Original U.K. CD
>>> U.S. promo on grey marbled vinyl.
>>>
>>> They both sucked and in very similar ways. Muddy yet glassy sound.
>>> The CD
>> had
>>> better bass extension (not that it was good) but it had that typical
>>> early
>> CD
>>> tin can quality. The LP was not as noisy as I expected but it was a
>>> mess
>> in the
>>> imaging department. The sound was kind of lumped together vaguely
>>> between
>> the
>>> speakers with no specific imaging and no depth. The CD wasn't much
>>> better
>> in
>>> this regard. Both were painfully lacking in detail and dynamics. All
>>> in
>> all i
>>> would have to listen more to say which sucked worse but I simply
>>> don't
>> want to.

>>snip<<

Just look at the way you mutilated to contort this fine paragraph. Does
setting the line length through your keyboard too perplexing for your
convoluted cerebellum? How many times have you been told to ameliorate your
unsatisfactory skills in this dept. How many times have you been taught
how it was done? I have to snip the rest of your imbecility as it is obvious
to me that parts of your DNA was extracted from a baboon. Be that as it may,
the lurkers must be laughing at you.


Did you know...



You are defective.
You are a glitch,
an impure thought
too absurd to absorb.

You are a dandruff,
a pressing numbnut.
An ulcerated wound
boiling excreta.

You are an infection.
A creaming open sore,
teeming with pus,
oozing putrid crud.

You are a pollution,
a sludge,a slush,a scuzz
A shoddy worthless skank
second to none!

You are a mental man.


>>
>> Chris said
>> curious said Alice
>> Have you tried cutting the vinyl to a CD and then compare the two ?
>> No I haven't.
>
>
>
> To do such a thing would be well beyond sockpuppet wheel's intellectual and
> physical resources. Remember that sockpuppet wheel hides behind aliases, has
> no known education, no known job, no known posessions.



You've yet to explain why this particular vinyl outscored the rest in every
concievable way. Would you care to explain your disdain towards this format.

[Arny Krueger]

"JBorg" > wrote in message
om

> You've yet to explain why this particular vinyl outscored the rest in
> every concievable way.

Since I hvaen't made the same comparison, I have no idea. I know that
sockpuppet wheel is highly biased and hysterical, so there's no reason for
me to grant his comments one iota of credibility.

> Would you care to explain your disdain towards this format.

Even taken at face value which would be a very stupid thing to do, there is
no reason to interpret sockpuppet wheel's comment as being relevant to
distribution formats.

[S888Wheel]

Arny said

<<
Since I hvaen't made the same comparison, I have no idea. I know that
sockpuppet wheel is highly biased and hysterical, so there's no reason for
me to grant his comments one iota of credibility.


Of course you are quite impartial. I guess you ignored the part where I said I
was surprised by the results. Since you seem to be incapable of deductive
reasoning that implies that the results were not in line with my biases. Do you
even know who Kate Bush is? By the way it is spelled haven't not haevn't.

Arny said


<<
Even taken at face value which would be a very stupid thing to do, there is
no reason to interpret sockpuppet wheel's comment as being relevant to
distribution formats.

Duh, given the fact that I said as much already. I agree that it would be
stupid for you take anything I say about audio at face value. The Simply Vinyl
issue of Hounds of Love would be wasted on your turntable. It would be wasted
on your ears as well. I would much rather see these records in the hands of
people who would appreciate them. Get the CD and learn something about cutting
edge popular music from the end of the progressive era. Never mind, there is no
way you are gonna get Kate Bush's music. Stick with Billy Joel.

[dave weil]

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:23:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"JBorg" > wrote in message
om
>
>> You've yet to explain why this particular vinyl outscored the rest in
>> every concievable way.
>
>Since I hvaen't made the same comparison, I have no idea. I know that
>sockpuppet wheel is highly biased and hysterical, so there's no reason for
>me to grant his comments one iota of credibility.

Hell, you've probably not even heard the album in question.

But this would be an audio discussion, so I'm frankly surprised that
you're even participating. I *do* note that you are crapping all over
the discussion even though you've never "made the comparison".

>> Would you care to explain your disdain towards this format.
>
>Even taken at face value which would be a very stupid thing to do, there is
>no reason to interpret sockpuppet wheel's comment as being relevant to
>distribution formats.

Great "science", Arnold.

[JBorg]

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "JBorg wrote in message


>
>> You've yet to explain why this particular vinyl outscored the rest in
>> every concievable way.
>
>
> Since I hvaen't made the same comparison, I have no idea. I know that
> sockpuppet wheel is highly biased and hysterical, so there's no reason for
> me to grant his comments one iota of credibility.


You believe that S8 is biased and hysterical
and so he has no crediblity, yet you made no comparison
on various issues of Hounds of Love.

Hmm, you're just trolling aren't you?


>> Would you care to explain your disdain towards this format.
>
>
> Even taken at face value which would be a very stupid thing to do, there is
> no reason to interpret sockpuppet wheel's comment as being relevant to
> distribution formats.



What if, say, a good friend of you like, for example, the repressible
Howard Ferstler, says that among five women he randomly selected from
your nieghborhive, your submissive common-law wife, Susan Kroobitch has
the most enticingly luscious pussy ****, would you then admit to comment
that:

"Taken at face value, which would be a very stupid thing to do,
there is no reason to interpret that Mr. Ferstler's comment as
being relevant to distribution formats."


WTF is this distribution format you speak of?

[Arny Krueger]

"JBorg" > wrote in message
om

>> Arny Krueger wrote:

>>> "JBorg wrote in message

>>> You've yet to explain why this particular vinyl outscored the rest
>>> in every concievable way.

>> Since I hvaen't made the same comparison, I have no idea. I know
>> that sockpuppet wheel is highly biased and hysterical, so there's no
>> reason for me to grant his comments one iota of credibility.

> You believe that S8 is biased and hysterical
> and so he has no credibility, yet you made no comparison
> on various issues of Hounds of Love.

Typical of your intellectual dishonesty JBorg. You've effectively deified
one recording of tens of thousands, and are claiming that I'm a piece of
crap because I don't have a half-dozen different versions that one recording
on hand. Weil did the same thing. You're both just spewing self-righteous
crap, which is what you do.

> Hmm, you're just trolling aren't you?

There's a point here being that Sockpuppet Wheel's reactions to these
recordings are just his reactions to casual listening under undisclosed
conditions, and nothing more. His article would have been more interesting
if he would have written something about his summer vacation, whether or not
he spent the summer in rehab for substance abuse via solvent inhalation.

>>> Would you care to explain your disdain towards this format.

>> Even taken at face value which would be a very stupid thing to do,
>> there is no reason to interpret sockpuppet wheel's comment as being
>> relevant to distribution formats.

> What if, say, a good friend of you like, for example, the repressible
> Howard Ferstler, says that among five women he randomly selected from
> your nieghborhive, your submissive common-law wife, Susan Kroobitch
> has the most enticingly luscious pussy ****, would you then admit to
> comment that:

> "Taken at face value, which would be a very stupid thing to do,
> there is no reason to interpret that Mr. Ferstler's comment as
> being relevant to distribution formats."

Gee could you be more childish and disgusting, JBorg? As intentionally
disgusting and trivial as you've gone out of your way to make this posts be,
you could just be a sockpuppet of Marc Phillips or one of his demented
little fiends like Felix. Just answer me this JBorg, what did you do with
the body after you raped and murdered your mother?

> WTF is this distribution format you speak of?

Just to kind of bring you up to speed with basic technical terminology that
you in your ignorance and arrogance obviously can't properly decode JBorg, a
distribution format is something like LP, CD, SACD, DVD-V or DVD-A. It's a
physical format that is used to distribute recordings, say as opposed to a
format that is used to produce recordings.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Mr. Borg wrote:


>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>> "JBorg wrote in message
>
>
>>
>>> You've yet to explain why this particular vinyl outscored the rest in
>>> every concievable way.
>>
>>
>> Since I hvaen't made the same comparison, I have no idea. I know that
>> sockpuppet wheel is highly biased and hysterical, so there's no reason for
>> me to grant his comments one iota of credibility.
>
>
>You believe that S8 is biased and hysterical
>and so he has no crediblity, yet you made no comparison
>on various issues of Hounds of Love.
>
>Hmm, you're just trolling aren't you?
>
>

Is the Pope Catholic? Q.E.D.

There is also no evidence offered to support the claim that Mr. Wheeler is
hysterical. As for complaints of his being "highly biased", the person making
the complaint has demonstrated that quality himself for years on RAO. How else
to explain his attack threads re. vinyl playback and numerous other subjects?



>>> Would you care to explain your disdain towards this format.
>>
>>
>> Even taken at face value which would be a very stupid thing to do, there is
>> no reason to interpret sockpuppet wheel's comment as being relevant to
>> distribution formats.
>
>
>
>What if, say, a good friend of you like, for example, the repressible
>Howard Ferstler, says that among five women he randomly selected from
>your nieghborhive, your submissive common-law wife, Susan Kroobitch has
>the most enticingly luscious pussy ****, would you then admit to comment
>that:
>
> "Taken at face value, which would be a very stupid thing to do,
> there is no reason to interpret that Mr. Ferstler's comment as
> being relevant to distribution formats."
>
>
>WTF is this distribution format you speak of?
>
>
>
>
>
>



Bruce J. Richman

[S888Wheel]

Arny said

<<
>> Since I hvaen't made the same comparison, I have no idea. I know
>> that sockpuppet wheel is highly biased and hysterical, so there's no
>> reason for me to grant his comments one iota of credibility. >>

JBorg said

<<

> You believe that S8 is biased and hysterical
> and so he has no credibility, yet you made no comparison
> on various issues of Hounds of Love.


Arny said


<<
Typical of your intellectual dishonesty JBorg. You've effectively deified
one recording of tens of thousands,


No, he is simply pointing out that you have no basis for any opinion on the
audio matter that was being discussed before you crapped on the thread.

Arny said

<< I'm a piece of
crap because I don't have a half-dozen different versions that one recording
on hand. Weil did the same thing. You're both just spewing self-righteous
crap, which is what you do.


No, again it is about your choice to crap on a thread that you are in no
poition to contribute to. What you seem to not understand is that if you have
nothing to offer then simply leaving the thread alone is the obvious choice for
a normal person.

Arny said

<<
There's a point here being that Sockpuppet Wheel's reactions to these
recordings are just his reactions to casual listening under undisclosed
conditions, and nothing more.

Everyone reading my post already knew that. I was pretty clear about what i
did. You just wanted to crap on the thread because you cannot control your
mallice. I guess it kills you to see people having civil discussions on audio
here on RAO. It is no wonder you were banned from RAHE.

Arny said

<< His article would have been more interesting
if he would have written something about his summer vacation,

Naturally this is true for anyone with your lack of interest in music. for
those who actually know who Kate Bush is and enjoy her music my "article" may
have been of interest.

Arny said

<< whether or not
he spent the summer in rehab for substance abuse via solvent inhalation.

Arny displays his sociopathic fantasies again. I made it quite clear that I do
not nor have not ever abused any such substances. The file for the judge and
jury did get one page thicker though. Arny why do you keep fantasizing about me
abusing drugs? Why would you pile libelous statement upon libelous statement
when you are being sued for libel?


Arny said

<<
Gee could you be more childish and disgusting, JBorg?

This coming from a guy who tries to defame people by falsely accusing them of
pedophilia and drug abuse.

Arny said

<< Just answer me this JBorg, what did you do with
the body after you raped and murdered your mother?


Could you be more disgusting Arny?

[dave weil]

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:21:15 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>You've effectively deified
>one recording of tens of thousands, and are claiming that I'm a piece of
>crap because I don't have a half-dozen different versions that one recording
>on hand. Weil did the same thing.

No I didn't. I pointed out that you probably hadn't even ever heard
*one* version of this album and for you to comment on it was folly.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:21:15 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote first:

>Gee could you be more childish and disgusting, JBorg? As intentionally
>disgusting and trivial as you've gone out of your way to make this posts be,
>you could just be a sockpuppet of Marc Phillips or one of his demented
>little fiends like Felix.

Then he wrote:

>Just answer me this JBorg, what did you do with
>the body after you raped and murdered your mother?

Leading by example, I suppose, Mr. Krueger.

[George M. Middius]

dave weil said to ****-for-Brains:

> I pointed out that you probably hadn't even ever heard
> *one* version of this album and for you to comment on it was folly.

Unless it was Krooger doing his "debating trade" shtick.

[Marc Phillips]

S888Wheel said:

>Could you be more disgusting Arny?
>

All I know is that if you're successful with your lawsuit, there's going to be
a long line behind you. I know I got all the evidence I need in the last 24
hours.

Boon

[Arny Krueger]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message

> S888Wheel said:
>
>> Could you be more disgusting Arny?
>>
>
> All I know is that if you're successful with your lawsuit, there's
> going to be a long line behind you. I know I got all the evidence I
> need in the last 24 hours.

Don't let me stop you, loser. File now!

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:21:15 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> You've effectively deified
>> one recording of tens of thousands, and are claiming that I'm a
>> piece of crap because I don't have a half-dozen different versions
>> that one recording on hand. Weil did the same thing.
>
> No I didn't. I pointed out that you probably hadn't even ever heard
> *one* version of this album and for you to comment on it was folly.

Just shows how clueless you are Weil. I didn't comment on the album, I
commented on sockpuppet wheel's comments. OTOH maybe you are smart, and were
just lying. Which was it?

[Arny Krueger]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>
> There is also no evidence offered to support the claim that Mr.
> Wheeler is hysterical.

As you put it sockpuppet Richman, "Is the Pope Catholic?"

> As for complaints of his being "highly
> biased", the person making the complaint has demonstrated that
> quality himself for years on RAO.

It's impossible for any human to avoid personal bias in all that he does.
I'm human. Q.E.D.

> How else to explain his attack threads re. vinyl playback and numerous
other subjects?

Well, in that case I'm just being factual. The LP format was long in the
tooth when it was finally consigned to the scrapheap by the marketplace more
than 10 years ago. Compared to the complete and utter sonic transparency of
the CD format. vinyl is a horrific sea of noise and distortion.
Interestingly enough a tiny noisy minority of vinylphiles can't hear the
cacophony of noise and distortion inherent in vinyl playback. I think its
due to their state of mind, which often becomes hysterical when they are
appraised of the folly of their claims that vinyl is a superior format to
digital.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:06:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:21:15 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> You've effectively deified
>>> one recording of tens of thousands, and are claiming that I'm a
>>> piece of crap because I don't have a half-dozen different versions
>>> that one recording on hand. Weil did the same thing.
>>
>> No I didn't. I pointed out that you probably hadn't even ever heard
>> *one* version of this album and for you to comment on it was folly.
>
>Just shows how clueless you are Weil. I didn't comment on the album, I
>commented on sockpuppet wheel's comments. OTOH maybe you are smart, and were
>just lying. Which was it?

Commenting on his comments about the album is commenting on the album.

Sorry, you lose.

Again.

[S888Wheel]

<<
Just shows how clueless you are Weil. I didn't comment on the album, I
commented on sockpuppet wheel's comments. OTOH maybe you are smart, and were
just lying. Which was it?

You crapped on a thread when you knew nothing about the subject. The subject
was the quality of different issues of The Hounds of Love, it wasn't "Arny's
hatred for those who enjoy music."

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:06:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:21:15 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> You've effectively deified
>>>> one recording of tens of thousands, and are claiming that I'm a
>>>> piece of crap because I don't have a half-dozen different versions
>>>> that one recording on hand. Weil did the same thing.
>>>
>>> No I didn't. I pointed out that you probably hadn't even ever heard
>>> *one* version of this album and for you to comment on it was folly.
>>
>> Just shows how clueless you are Weil. I didn't comment on the album,
>> I commented on sockpuppet wheel's comments. OTOH maybe you are
>> smart, and were just lying. Which was it?
>
> Commenting on his comments about the album is commenting on the album.

Just cause you say up is down Weil, doesn't mean that airplanes are going to
start diving to take off.

> Sorry, you lose.

> Again.

Pathetic!

[dave weil]

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:46:41 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:06:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:21:15 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You've effectively deified
>>>>> one recording of tens of thousands, and are claiming that I'm a
>>>>> piece of crap because I don't have a half-dozen different versions
>>>>> that one recording on hand. Weil did the same thing.
>>>>
>>>> No I didn't. I pointed out that you probably hadn't even ever heard
>>>> *one* version of this album and for you to comment on it was folly.
>>>
>>> Just shows how clueless you are Weil. I didn't comment on the album,
>>> I commented on sockpuppet wheel's comments. OTOH maybe you are
>>> smart, and were just lying. Which was it?
>>
>> Commenting on his comments about the album is commenting on the album.
>
>Just cause you say up is down Weil, doesn't mean that airplanes are going to
>start diving to take off.

Thank you for admitting that I'm right. It must have taken an abnormal
amount of self-control. My hat's off to ya!

>> Sorry, you lose.
>
>> Again.
>
>Pathetic!

Are airplanes now diving to take off, Arnold?

<s******>

[George M. Middius]

G.Snail said:

> >> All I know is that if you're successful with your lawsuit, there's
> >> going to be a long line behind you.

> >Don't let me stop you, loser. File now!

> Apparantly Krueger wishes to bring shame on himself and his family by
> libelling folk then encouraging them to seek justice. Talk about self
> destruction!

This plea from Mr. **** would also explain why he keeps calling dave
weil his "dominatrix".

[JBorg]

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "JBorg" wrote in message
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>> "JBorg wrote in message
>
>
>
>>>> You've yet to explain why this particular vinyl outscored the rest
>>>> in every concievable way.
>
>>> Since I hvaen't made the same comparison, I have no idea. I know
>>> that sockpuppet wheel is highly biased and hysterical, so there's no
>>> reason for me to grant his comments one iota of credibility.
>
>> You believe that S8 is biased and hysterical
>> and so he has no credibility, yet you made no comparison
>> on various issues of Hounds of Love.
>
> Typical of your intellectual dishonesty JBorg. You've effectively deified
> one recording of tens of thousands, and are claiming that I'm a piece of
> crap because I don't have a half-dozen different versions that one recording
> on hand. Weil did the same thing. You're both just spewing self-righteous
> crap, which is what you do.


Self righteous crap? You're the one who admitted that you've yet to make
comparison between diff. issues of Hounds of Love but went on to state that
the results was unacceptable. Whose spewing gas here?

>
>> Hmm, you're just trolling aren't you?
>
> There's a point here being that Sockpuppet Wheel's reactions to these
> recordings are just his reactions to casual listening under undisclosed
> conditions, and nothing more.


This is plain signs and symptoms of your psychosis. The point that "must"
be made here is that if it is in fact based on casual listening, what else
kinds of conditions needs to be disclose?



> His article would have been more interesting
> if he would have written something about his summer vacation, whether or not
> he spent the summer in rehab for substance abuse via solvent inhalation.
>
>
>>>> Would you care to explain your disdain towards this format.
>
>>> Even taken at face value which would be a very stupid thing to do,
>>> there is no reason to interpret sockpuppet wheel's comment as being
>>> relevant to distribution formats.
>
>> What if, say, a good friend of you like, for example, the repressible
>> Howard Ferstler, says that among five women he randomly selected from
>> your nieghborhive, your submissive common-law wife, Susan Kroobitch,
>> has the most enticingly luscious pussy ****, would you then admit to
>> comment that:
>
>> "Taken at face value, which would be a very stupid thing to do,
>> there is no reason to interpret that Mr. Ferstler's comment as
>> being relevant to distribution formats."
>
> Gee could you be more childish and disgusting, JBorg? As intentionally
> disgusting and trivial as you've gone out of your way to make this posts be,
> you could just be a sockpuppet of Marc Phillips or one of his demented
> little fiends like Felix.

.......... the Kroobitch having a succulent pussy **** is trivial to you?
I'm not sure if Ferstler would agree.


> Just answer me this JBorg, what did you do with
> the body after you raped and murdered your mother?
>
>> WTF is this distribution format you speak of?
>
> Just to kind of bring you up to speed with basic technical terminology that
> you in your ignorance and arrogance obviously can't properly decode JBorg, a
> distribution format is something like . . .

C'mon, what exactly does this distribution formats have to do with the other
equally delectable pussy**** that Ferstler haphazardly selected among your
neighbor ?




> LP, CD, SACD, DVD-V or DVD-A. It's a
> physical format that is used to distribute recordings, say as opposed to a
> format that is used to produce recordings.



You appear to be saying that LP, CD, SACD, DVD-V or DVD-A formats should
not affect the resulting sound quality used to produce recordings ie the
distribution formats are irrelevant.

If so, then, you must proportionately be disdainful of those who claim that CD's
offer better sonics 'cause as you said to S8 when he made comparison between
various formats of Hounds of Love that:


"... there is no reason to interpret sockpuppet wheel's comment as being
relevant to distribution formats."


If not, where you lying all along about CDs ?

[JBorg]

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Just answer me this JBorg, what did you do with
> the body after you raped and murdered your mother?





I don't know about this.

[Anonymous]

"G.Snail" > wrote in message
...
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
> >>> Could you be more disgusting Arny?
> >>
> >> All I know is that if you're successful with your lawsuit, there's
> >> going to be a long line behind you. I know I got all the evidence I
> >> need in the last 24 hours.
> >
> >Don't let me stop you, loser. File now!
>
> Apparantly Krueger wishes to bring shame on himself and his family by
> libelling folk then encouraging them to seek justice. Talk about self
> destruction!

of course, that is not his only method of shaming himself.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[JBorg]

> Bruce J. Richman wrote:
>> Mr. Borg wrote:
>
>
>>
>> You believe that S8 is biased and hysterical
>> and so he has no crediblity, yet you made no comparison
>> on various issues of Hounds of Love.
>>
>> Hmm, you're just trolling aren't you?
>>
>>
>
> Is the Pope Catholic? Q.E.D.
>
> There is also no evidence offered to support the claim that Mr. Wheeler is
> hysterical. As for complaints of his being "highly biased", the person
> making the complaint has demonstrated that quality himself for years on
> RAO.

That's crystal clear.

> How else to explain his attack threads re. vinyl playback and
> numerous other subjects?


There's something about vinyl lovers that troubles his mind.


>
>
> Bruce J. Richman